5 Reasons Cincinnati Shouldn't Sign Owens

by Oregonbengalsfan on Jul 27, 2010 2:50 PM EDT

Found this story on Bleacher Report (meh) but after going scanning through it I couldn't resist to make my points on his 5 reasons not to sign TO.

Terrell Owens: Five Reasons the Cincinnati Bengals Shouldn't Sign Him

Here was my comment to the article:

As for #5 No chemistry with Carson - Carson Palmer has been working out with Terrell Owens and has contacted Lewis and told him how much of an asset TO would be to the team.

4. Stunted growth of young receivers - valid argument

3. Owen's age - while he is getting up there, he is still productive and it wouldn't be a long term deal

2. Worsens Bengals character - there isn't anything that could bolster Bengals character according to most pundits. Moot point.

1. One ball to go around - Chad Ochocinco has been TO's biggest lobbiest until Palmer spoke up for him to Lewis. TO and Ocho are good friends.

1 valid point out of 5...meh

What about everyone else... agree with authors points or not so much?

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Cincy Jungle's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Cincy Jungle's writers or editors.

Tweet Comment 12 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

#6 roster slots.

if to is on the roster someone else already on the roster isn’t.

"wherever Brad St. Louis is and Shayne Graham is about to be." -R.F. Mehl

by palewook on Jul 27, 2010 3:00 PM EDT reply actions

unless TO takes coats slot

then the point becomes a positive thing.

"wherever Brad St. Louis is and Shayne Graham is about to be." -R.F. Mehl

by palewook on Jul 27, 2010 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions

RE: T.O's character

Notice that the first year everywhere he goes, he’s a good little boy? Was he a problem with the Eagles? No. It was his second year that he was send home for the rest of the season. Problems with the Cowboys? Not really — one could argue that Parcells made a bigger deal of T.O. than T.O. did of anything else.

Holy shit. Just realized. I defended T.O. outright for the first time in my life. He MUST be close to becoming a Bengal.

Blogger at CincyJungle.com -- SB Nation Cincinnati Bengals blog.

by Josh Kirkendall on Jul 27, 2010 3:11 PM EDT reply actions

Carson

Carson told multiple people that T.O. was by far the best reciever he has been working out with in Cali…..thats counts for something like or not

it comes down to mind over matter....if you don't mind, it won't matter

by TruWhoDey on Jul 27, 2010 3:28 PM EDT reply actions

RE

Yea, apparently it did with Mikey and Marvin for sure.

Blogger at CincyJungle.com -- SB Nation Cincinnati Bengals blog.

by Josh Kirkendall on Jul 27, 2010 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions

RE:

You see that hilarious shot of TO in a whig from his show? It was in the teaser during Chad’s show….hysterical

it comes down to mind over matter....if you don't mind, it won't matter

by TruWhoDey on Jul 27, 2010 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions

1 Ball to go around

That is stupid! Peyton Manning and Kurt Warner didn’t have an issue with too few balls when they each had 3 × 1,000 yard receivers. Never heard it was a problem when they went to the superbowl. in fact every team with 3 thousand yard recievers had a winning record. When Palmer had 2 legitimate NFL WR, in 2005, 2006, and 2007, there was no animosity between recievers. The reason, I think, is because better recievers actually caatch the ball. This creates a better completion percentage for the QB, and also creates more first downs, which allows the QB to throw more passes, which creates more opportunities to catch the ball. Also, it makes the defense choose which reciever to cover and which reciever to assume risk. You have to rush at least 4 people in the NFL on a standard down. If not you don’t get pressure and the QB will tear you up. That leaves 7 players to cover 5 potential receivers. You have to leava 3 recievers in single coverage, or play zone. Let’s assume that Defenses cover Chad and Bryant. I for one would prefer that they guy in single coverage be the guy with the 3rd most receiving yards all time than Caldwell or Shipley. I also prefer one of the other guys to be Jermaine Gresham to Dan Coats. If that makes me crazy, I am ok with that.

by jim0ijk on Jul 27, 2010 4:19 PM EDT reply actions

Agree--I don't think TO and Chad will mind sharing...

…a few catches if it leads to a Super Bowl.

by goffchile on Jul 27, 2010 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions

T O Knows...

Time is running out,if you listened to the TMZ vid that Josh put out,hes telling ALL the teams,not just the contenders,but ALL the teams he would be flexable on half of what he made last year,and still yet,not one team has come a calling,the Bengals was the only one that really had any interest,and where it was early in free agency,he was thinking more or the same money he made last year,the Bengals brought him in only to put pressure in the Bryants camp,thats why Bryant signed so fast.

by Primal on Jul 27, 2010 4:41 PM EDT reply actions

The ball is in his court now..

T.O. has a choice to play for an incentive laden contract and go to training camp signed or hold out until someone may or may not get hurt and then negotiate a contract that may be or may not be worth less than the one we’re offering… If he holds out in hopes of finding something better its a gamble at this point.. Is T.O. a gambling man?

by JamesShively on Jul 27, 2010 4:55 PM EDT reply actions

the economy isnt getting any better..

just look at the ticket sales for the Bengals,theirs not much movement,and this is a last years playoff team thats went underfeated and won one of the best conferences in the NFL,goes to show you if your gonna gamble money that wont be there after the season starts,you better think long and hard about not taking the best avaliable offer before the season starts,because the money trail thins out longer into the season for rental players.

by Primal on Jul 27, 2010 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions